You are here

OASIS West London Office Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 17 February 2021

About the service

Oasis West London Office is a domiciliary care agency providing care and support to people living in their own homes in London and the South East of England. The provider, Oasis Care and Training Agency (OCTA), is a non-profit making charity with three domiciliary care branches and a separate training department offering health and social care training.

At the time of our inspection 91 people were using the service form this branch. Most people were older adults, although some were younger adults with physical disabilities.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were happy with support they received. They felt safe and well cared for. They were involved in planning their care and felt this met their needs and preferences. People, and their families, had good relationships with the care workers, who were kind and treated them respectfully.

There were enough suitable staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. There were robust recruitment processes and staff received the training, supervision and support they needed to understand their roles and responsibilities. The staff liked working at the agency and felt well supported.

People's care had been planned and was regularly reviewed to make sure it met their needs. Plans included assessments of risks and how people should be supported to minimise the risk of harm. Staff kept records to show how they had cared for people. These records showed. people had received their medicines as prescribed, had support with food and drinks and that the staff liaised with other care professionals to help keep people healthy.

There were systems for the provider to learn when things went wrong. These included investigating accidents, incidents and complaints, and taking steps to protect people from further harm. The management team worked closely with other agencies and professionals, as well as asking stakeholders for feedback. There were systems for monitoring the quality of the service, included making improvements based on feedback from others.

The provider offered a community service to local people. This included offering training and employment for local unemployed workers, translation services and supporting people from minority ethnic groups to access and to understand information about healthcare services.

The registered manager worked closely with the nominated individual and other senior staff to monitor and manage the service. People using the service, their relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection (and update)

The rating at the last inspection was requires improvement (Published 4 September 2019). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas



Updated 17 February 2021

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 17 February 2021

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 17 February 2021

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 17 February 2021

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 17 February 2021

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.